Kiddushin, Daf Tet, Part 2

 

Introduction

Today s daf begins to discuss how kiddushin is done by document. Up until now we have only been discussing kiddushin with money or goods.

 

ת"ר בשטר כיצד כתב לו על הנייר או על החרס אע"פ שאין בו שוה פרוטה בתך מקודשת לי בתך מאורסת לי בתך לי לאינתו הרי זו מקודשת

 

Our Rabbis taught: [A woman is betrothed] by document: How so? If he writes for him on a paper or a shard, even if it is not worth a perutah, Your daughter is consecrated to me, your daughter is betrothed to me, [or] your daughter is my wife, she is betrothed.

 

Interestingly, when it comes to marriage by document, the cases are all where the husband gives the document to the father of the girl being married, and he marries his daughter off. This can only occur while she is a minor. I am not sure if this is reflective of reality. In any case, these three phrases count as the language of kiddushin. The baraita also notes that the physical apparatus on which the formula is written need not be worth anything. If it is worth a perutah, this could be kiddushin by money.

 

מתקיף לה ר’ זירא בר ממל הא לא דמי האי שטרא לשטר זביני התם מוכר כותב לו שדי מכורה לך הכא בעל כותב בתך מקודשת לי

 

R. Zera b. Mammel raised an objection: This document is not the same as a document of sale: There the seller writes, My field is sold to you, whereas here the husband writes, Your daughter is consecrated to me!

 

R. Zera b. Mammel notes an anomaly. Generally when a person sells something, the seller writes out a document. Here, the one acquiring, the husband, writes out a document. Why doesn t she write the document saying that she is betrothed to So-and-so? Or her father should write the document?

אמר רבא התם מעניינא דקרא והכא מעניינא דקרא התם כתיב (ויקרא כה, כה) ומכר מאחוזתו במוכר תלה רחמנא הכא כתיב (דברים כב, יג) כי יקח בבעל תלה רחמנא

 

Rava said: There it is determined by the context of the verse, and here too it is determined by the context of the verse. There it is written, And he sells of his possessions (Leviticus 25:25): the Torah made it dependent on the seller: whereas here it is written, When a man [takes a wife] (Deuteronomy 22:13), the Torah makes it dependent on the husband.

 

Rava resolves the difficulty by noting that in the case of selling possessions, the Torah describes the seller as selling his field. Whereas when it comes to marriage, the husband takes a wife. I might note that this is essentially noting that marriage is not really a sale. It is an acquisition but no one is really selling anything.

 

התם נמי כתיב (ירמיהו לב, מד) שדות בכסף יקנו קרי ביה יקנו מאי טעמא קרית ביה יקנו משום דכתיב ומכר ה"נ קרי ביה כי יקח דכתיב (דברים כב, טז) את בתי נתתי לאיש הזה

 

But there too it is written, They shall buy fields for money (Jeremiah 32:44)?

Read: They shall transfer [i.e., sell].

Now, why do you read transfer ? Because it is written: And he sells ! Then here too read: If a man be taken, for it is written: I gave my daughter to this man for a wife (Deuteronomy 22:16)?

 

The Talmud notes that elsewhere the Tanakh describes a sale from the vantage point of the acquirer. So why then does the seller write the document.

At first the resolution is to revocalize the text so that it reads they shall transfer, referring to the seller. The problem is that there is no compelling reason to read the text this way. And if we re going to revocalize texts, we can do so with the text about marriage too, reading it as if it says, If [a father] causes (yakiah) a woman to be taken by a man. Furthermore, there is a verse that describes marriage from the viewpoint of the man whose daughter is getting married. Why, then, doesn t he, or if she is old enough, she, write the document?

 

אלא אמר רבא הלכתא נינהו ואסמכינהו רבנן אקראי ואיבעית אימא התם נמי כתיב (ירמיהו לב, יא) ואקח את ספר המקנה

 

Rather Rava said: These are halakhot, which the Rabbis supported by verses.

Alternatively, there too it is written, So I took the deed of the purchase (Jeremiah 32:11).

 

Rava ends up concluding that the rule that the husband writes the document is a tradition supported by a verse, but not one that originates in the verse. In other words, this is just how things are done.

Alternatively, there is another verse that ascribes the writing of sales documents to the seller. This would tip the scales in favor of this document being written by the seller.